2

2

4

5

6

10

13

15

18

21

24

27

30

32

http://www.irc-web.co.jp

http://www.dkh.co.jp

http://www.4assist.co.jp

I

�

�

1

Bridge the Gap 1

1992

�

knowing thatknowing

how

�

科 学 知 （説明知，理論知）

実 践 知 （生活知，行動知，技術知，身体知，暗黙知，

臨床知）

10 20

�

Web

1

62

2

735 17211

�

a) b)

c)

3

5 1 2

3

Football Science

2004 12012 7

20127 1

2011 17 201218

3

1

2

�

3 (

)

4(

)

2010 5

( )

�

1

2 3 4

80

( 2012)

II

�

��

1

1

2 4 6 1 7

1

- 7

2 6

Kinematics

Energetics

1 , 2 )

2.1

2 13 1.23±0.04m

24.4±3.6kg 4 13

1.34±0.05m 30.0±6.1kg 6 16

1.45±0.07m 37.9±6.9kg 42

3

CASIO EXILIM EX-F1

300

1/1000

7

1

2.2

23

24 Frame-DIAS DKH

DLT 3

3

7.5

12.5Hz Butterworth digital filter

��

Scheffe’s post hoc test 5

3.1

2 16.30±3.54m 4

25.58±4.50m 6 35.34±4.35m

p<0.05

2 14.05±1.62m/s 4

17.77±1.92m/s 6 21.76±1.30m/s

p<0.05

3.2

Figure 1

Figure 1. Patterns of mechanical energy of throwing arm segments for the typical throwers.

Figure 2. Patterns of mechanical power, joint force power (JFP) and segment torque power

(STP) of upper arm (top), forearm (middle) and hand (bottom) for the typical

��

Figure 2

7

2 6

Table 1

7 2

6

6

6

3 )

6

1)

3

46, 55–68 (1997).

2)

8 1 , 12–26

(2004).

3)

57 2 , 613–629 (2012).

Table 1. Peak joint force power of the shoulder, elbow and wrist for all analyzed throwers.

��

2

10 15 1 1 9 135

100

1

2

3

2.1

1.77 m

70.0 kg 21 years

2.2

10 15 1

1 9 135

VICON612 VICON

250 2

Kistler

1,000Hz

135

1 3 5 7 9

15 5=753

��

3.1

1-5 1-7 1-9

3-7 5-9

p< 0.05

3.2

1-5

1-7 1-9 3-5 3-7 3-9

p< 0.05

3.3

7

1

1 7 1

1

2

4

1) 3

pp. 372–424 (2001).

2)

. 13(1) , 31–37 (2009).

3)

. 59(2) , 225–232

(2010).

4)

.

4(1) , 47–60 (2000).

Torq

ue [N

m]

Ang

Vel

. [ra

d/se

c]P

ower

[W]

Torq

ue [N

m]

Ang

Vel

. [ra

d/se

c]P

ower

[W]

0 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 [sec]

0 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 [sec]

0 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 [sec]

0 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 [sec]

0 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 [sec]

0 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 [sec]

[rad/

sec]

[Nm

][W

]

[rad/

sec]

[Nm

][W

]

��

1 1

1

90

20 240Hz

( = 90 5 ) 8 (2:1)

(5.7:1) 110 8 6 (

80 ) 98 3 (3.0:1)

120

90

1, 2)

3, 4)

5-7)

”dropped-elbow” technical

fault 3, 4)

90

90°

8)

9)

90

20

(Liberty, Polhemus)

3 240Hz

1

��

1

3

( )

( )

2

2

85 ± 10 3

3 20

8 6

8

90±5°

( 2 : 1)10)

135°

5.7 : 1

110 ± 8°

93 ± 6° 4

6

98 ± 3°

(3.0 : 1)

80°

73 ± 4° 4

120°

4

90

90°

COE

B

23300236

2011A-938

5.7 : 1 3.0 : 1

93 6 73 4

��

1) McFarland, J. Coaching pitchers. Leisure Press (Champaign, Ill.),(1990).

2) Johnson, M., et al. Baseball Skills and Drills. Human Kinetics,(2001).

3) Pink, M. M.&Perry, J. Biomechanics of the shoulder. In: F. W. Jobe, M. M. Pink and J. A. Schwegler, eds. Operative Techniques in Upper Extremity Sports Injuries. Mosby: St. Louis,109-123(1996).

4) Burkhart, S. S., et al. The disabled throwing shoulder: spectrum of pathology Part III: The SICK scapula, scapular dyskinesis, the kinetic chain, and rehabilitation Arthroscopy. 19,641-661 (2003)

5) Matsuo, T., et al. Optimal shoulder abduction angles during baseball pitching from maximal wrist velocity and minimal kinetics viewpoints J Appl Biomech. 18,306-320

(2002) 6) Matsuo, T.&Fleisig, G. S. Influence of

shoulder abduction and lateral trunk tilt on peak elbow varus torque for college baseball pitchers during simulated pitching J Appl Biomech. 22,93-102 (2006)

7) Atwater, A. E. Biomechanics of overarm throwing movements and of throwing injuries Exercise and sport sciences reviews. 7,43-85 (1979)

8) . . 3 . : ,48-86(2004).

9) Codman, E. Normal motions of the shoulder joint. The Shoulder: Rupture of the supraspinatus tendon and other lesions in or about the subacromial bursa. Thomas Todd: Boston(1934).

10) Inman, V. T., et al. Observations on the function of the shoulder joint J Bone Joint Surg. 26,1-30 (1944)

��

1 2 3

1 2 3

10 DLT

1)

1

150

1002-3)

10

4

��

200 2

2

DLT

3

3

3

4 7 A D F J

D F J

4 A

5 D

Th8

C7

��

6 F

7 J

1) Fleisig GS, et al. : Kinetics of baseball pitching with

implications about injury mechanisms. Am J Sports Med. 23:

233-239 (1995).

2) Miyashita K, et al.: Glenohumeral, Scapular, and Thoracic

Angles at Maximum Shoulder External Rotation in Throwing.

Am J Sports Med. 38:363-368(2010).

3)

30

113-118(2010)..

��

1 1

1

17

17 14

1)

2,3)

=

-32 ± 9° 1

17°4) 26°

8 9

2

��

1

2 3

90°0°

17 14

4 14 R2 = 0.885

39 ±

17° 53 ± 19°r = 0.936, p < 0.001

14

4

0° 90°180°

5 4

0° 180° 10°

5)

6

35°300 mm

0°

200 mm

��

30° A

COE

25750307;

1) Nathan, AM. The effect of spin on the flight of a baseball.

American Journal of Physiology, 76(2), 119-124 (2008).

2) Nagami, T et al. Spin on fastballs thrown by elite baseball

pitchers. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 43(12),

2321-2327 (2011).

3)

63(1),

47-51 (2013).

4) Jinji, T & Sakurai S. Direction of spin axis and spin rate of

the pitched baseball. Sports Biomechanics, 5(2):197-214

(2006).

5)

2012 , 74-78 (2012)

��

1

1

5

70 50 149 27 26

α

90

ωsinα

90

Adair1 20 30

6cm

1cm

Higuchi et al. 2

30 40 50 3

36m/s

30

30

5

2.1

70 Junior

��

50 High

1

149 Collegiate

27 Semipro

26 Pro

18

16.00m

6~10

High College Semipro Pro

145g 73.8mm

C 128g 68mm

B 135g 70mm

2.2

3 VICON MX

Oxford Metrics Inc. 4

6mm 3

12

1000Hz

O

Y

3 X

X 1

4

3

3

Y

α Jinji & Sakurai4

ωsinα

ωsinα

2.3

Pro

Dunnett

5

1 Semipro Pro

1

1

Velocity (m/s)

Junior 27.0 ± 3.4 ***

High 33.3 ± 2.5 ***

Collegiate 35.6 ± 1.9 ***

Semipro 36.3 ± 1.4

Pro 37.6 ± 1.5

***: p<0.001, **: p<0.01, *: p<0.05

2

Spin rate (rps)

Junior 23.9 ± 4.2 ***

High 29.7 ± 3.5 **

Collegiate 31.2 ± 3.6

Semipro 30.3 ± 3.2 *

Pro 32.9 ± 3.5

***: p<0.001, **: p<0.01, *: p<0.05

2 Pro

Collegiate

α Pro

Collegiate Semipro

3 α 90°

��

ωsinα Pro

4 Pro

90°

3 α

α (°)

Junior 58.9 ± 14.4 ***

High 62.8 ± 11.3 *

Collegiate 65.5 ± 12.2

Semipro 67.7 ± 12.2

Pro 70.3 ± 8.9

***: p<0.001, **: p<0.01, *: p<0.05

4 ωsinα

ωsinα

Junior 19.8 ± 4.7 ***

High 25.9 ± 4.3 ***

Collegiate 27.7 ± 4.3 *

Semipro 27.3 ± 3.7 *

Pro 30.5 ± 3.5

***: p<0.001, **: p<0.01, *: p<0.05

2

Pro

ωsinα4

Pro2

Pro

ωsinα Semipro=27.3 Pro=30.5

Jinji & Sakurai4 ωsinα

=36m/s =1.2 g/m3

Pro Semipro

6.8cm Adair1

1.3cm

2.5cm

2cm

Pro Semipro

1) Adair .K. R.. The physics of baseball. Harper & Row: New

York, (1990).

2) Higuchi, T. et al. The effect of fastball backspin rate on

baseball hitting accuracy. Journal of Applied Biomechanics

29, 279-284 (2013).

3) 1983

4) Jinji, T. & Sakurai,.S. Direction of Spin Axis and Spin Rate of

the Pitched baseball. Sports Biomechanics 5, 197-214 (2006)

��

1,2 1 1

1 2 (PD)

10

2

36 150

ms 300ms12

p < 0.05 150ms

1,2)

”perception-action coupling” 3)

10 5 5

145km/

PLATO Translucent

Technologies 1

1 150ms R+150

2 300msR+300 3 NO 3

12 36

1

��

2ON-580:125g

Trouble Shooter Fastec:1000Hz :1/10000

1

0.15m(Frame Dias DKH )

36

75.1mmR+150 R+300

NO±

38.1 ± 17.6 mm 25.9 ± 8.6 mm 23.9 ± 6.5 mm R+150

NO p < 0.052

± 29.0 ± 7.8 mm 19.4 ± 4.6

mm 19.2 ± 4.8 mm R+150

R+300 NO

p < 0.05

R+300 NO150ms

100ms 4) 200ms 5)

6)

1/3 R+1501

3

67)

1) Higuchi T et al. The Effects of Fastball Backspin Rate on

Baseball Hitting Accuracy. J Appl Biomech. 2013; 29,

279-284.

2) Higuchi T et al. Disturbance in Hitting Accuracy by

Professional and College Baseball Players Due to Intentional

��

Change of Target Position. Percep Motor Skills. 2013; 116(2),

627-639.

3) Ranganathan R & Carlton LG. Perception- Action Coupling

and Anticipatory Performance in Baseball Batting. J Motor

Behavior. 2007: 39(5): 369-380

4) Day BL & Lyon LN. Voluntary modification of automatic

arm movements evoked by motion of a visual target. Exp

Brain Res. 2000; 130: 159-168.

5) Engel KC & Soechting JF. Manual Tracking in Two

Dimensions. J Neurophysiol. 2000; 83: 3483-3496.

6) Shaffer B et al. Baseball batting.An electromyographic study.

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1993; 292:285-289.

7) Müller S & Abernethy B. Batting with occluded vision: an in

situ examination of the information pick-up and interceptive

skills of high- and low-skilled cricket batsmen. J Sci Med

Sport. 2006; 9(6): 446-58.

��

1 2

1 2

23 3

1)

2)

3)

2.1

23 1.74 0.04 m

74.1 6.2 kg 12.0 2.1 11

12 3

47

6

VICON 12 250Hz

2.2 2)

8

2 2 1000Hz

��

Fig. 1

Ybat Zbat

Xbat

Ybat

80%

80%

Zbat 0% 80%

60%

Xbat

0% 60%

80%

50%

60% 60% 80%

Ybat 0%

80%

Xbat

1)

10(1),

2-13(2006).

2)

30(8), 13-17(2010).

3)

17(1), 2-14(2013).

Fig. 1 Curves of the mean forces (Ybat, Zbat) and moments (Zbat) expressed by the moving bat coordinate system in the forward swing motion under hitting-point height conditions (High, Middle and Low).

Normalized time [%]

Barrel(Low)

Barrel(High)

Barrel(Middle)

Knob(Low)

Knob(High)

Knob(Middle)

-200

0

200

400

600

800

Forc

es [N

]

Ybat axis

X Z

Y

Xbat

Zbat

Ybat

-200

-100

0

100

200

Forc

es [N

]

Zbat axis

X Z

Y

Xbat

Zbat

Ybat

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

Mom

ents

[Nm

]

Xbat axis

X Z

Y

Xbat

Zbat

Ybat

0 20 40 60 80 100

��

��